On 10/04/2016 FLEET LOGIC, LLC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against TWENTY6 LETTERS CORP. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Norwalk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are LORI ANN FOURNIER, MASTER CALENDAR and MARGARET MILLER BERNAL. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
****5842
10/04/2016
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Norwalk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
LORI ANN FOURNIER
MASTER CALENDAR
MARGARET MILLER BERNAL
FLEET LOGIC LLC
VELOCITY TRUCK RENTAL & LEASING
TWENTY6 LETTERS CORP. A NEVADA CORP.
CHILDRESS TIM AN INDIVIDUAL
CHILDRESS PAIGE
CHILDRESS TIM
CHILDRESS PAIGE AN INDIVIDUAL
CHILDRESS AN INDIVIDUAL TIM
CHILDRESS AN INDIVIDUAL PAIGE
THE VANDERPOOL LAW FIRM
TOVAR HEATHER ANN
WILLIAM Y. SUNG
6/18/2019: Minute Order
6/19/2019: Notice of Ruling
6/28/2019: Order
12/29/2016: Legacy Document
12/29/2016: Statement of Damages (Personal Injury or Wrongful Death)
1/17/2017: Notice of Entry of Judgment
2/21/2017: Legacy Document
12/4/2017: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)
3/1/2018: Legacy Document
7/16/2018: Substitution of Attorney
8/2/2018: Notice of Motion
8/3/2018: Motion to Compel
8/3/2018: Motion to Compel
8/3/2018: Motion to Compel
9/13/2018: Legacy Document
9/13/2018: Legacy Document
10/26/2018: Opposition
6/4/2019: Declaration
Hearingat 09:30 AM in Department F at 12720 Norwalk Blvd., Norwalk, CA 90650; Jury Trial
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department F at 12720 Norwalk Blvd., Norwalk, CA 90650; Final Status Conference
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department F at 12720 Norwalk Blvd., Norwalk, CA 90650; Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)
Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department Legacy at 12720 Norwalk Blvd., Norwalk, CA 90650; Non-Appearance Case Review
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F, Margaret Miller Bernal, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion
DocketNotice (of Termination or Modification of Stay); Filed by FLEET LOGIC, LLC (Plaintiff)
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F, Margaret Miller Bernal, Presiding; Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F, Margaret Miller Bernal, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (to Vacate and Continue Mandatory Settlement Conference, Trial and All Trial Related Dates, Including Discovery; Declaration of Heather A. Tovar) - Held
DocketDefendant Paige Childress's Opposition to Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application to Vacate and Continue Trial, Mandatory Settlement Conference and All Related Dates; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof; Declarations in Support; Filed by Paige Childress, an individual (Defendant)
DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by FLEET LOGIC, LLC (Plaintiff)
DocketRtn of Service of Summons & Compl (BY SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ON 10/11/16 Affadavit of Reasonable Diligence attached ); Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
DocketRtn of Service of Summons & Compl (BY PERSONAL SERVICE ON 10/11/16 ); Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
DocketRtn of Service of Summons & Compl; Filed by FLEET LOGIC, LLC (Plaintiff)
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by FLEET LOGIC, LLC (Plaintiff)
DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Plaintiff
DocketSummons; Filed by Plaintiff
DocketComplaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
DocketSummons Filed; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
DocketNotice-Case Management Conference; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
DocketComplaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by VELOCITY TRUCK RENTAL & LEASING (Legacy Party); FLEET LOGIC, LLC (Plaintiff)
Case Number: VC065842 Hearing Date: December 10, 2019 Dept: SEC
FLEET LOGIC, LLC v. TWENTY6 LETTERS CORP., et al.
CASE NO.: VC065842
JUDGE: OLIVIA ROSALES
HEARING: 12/10/19
#10
TENTATIVE ORDER
Defendants Tim and Paige Childress’s motion to set aside and vacate ruling re sanctions is DENIED.
Plaintiff to give NOTICE.
Defendants Tim and Paige Childress move to set aside and vacate the ruling re sanctions pursuant to CCP 473.
The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (CCP 473(b).)
Defendants contend that their previous motions to quash were not made in bad faith and that the court “completely disregarded the operative motion itself.” (Motion, 4:25.) Defendants are essentially disagreeing with the court’s prior order. Such does not establish mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. Further, even if this motion is construed as a motion for reconsideration, the motion would be untimely. CCP 1008 requires that the motion be filed within 10 days of the order. The Order was issued on 10/10/19, but the motion was not filed until 11/8/19.
Further, Defendants contend the court denied their motions based solely on the lack of a separate statement. However, as this court stated in its 10/10/19 Order, Defendants did not attach the subpoenas at issue, and the court had no way of knowing what documents are being demanded or objected to. For this reason, the motions were denied. Defense counsel appeared at the hearing and failed to address this court's concerns.
Accordingly, the motion is DENIED.